What do you think about 3D? Do you like it? Hate it? Think it's better than 4K?

[Frank@Chicago]

IMHO, 3D can add alot to a movie if it's done well (that part's important).

When Guardians of the Galaxy came out I bought a 2D copy Day One, because the 3D markup was a little high and I didn't actually have a 3D TV yet.

Later I got a 3D TV and found a deal on just the 3D disc from a set that got split up.

Watching the movie now in 3D really opens things up, ships and planets look almost real (even though it's 'just' a conversion).

The hospital sequence at the very beginning of the movie is even much improved, the room has real space and feels like a real place.

Going back to the 2D version would be tough at this point, something that's probably true in many cases.

The 3D for many movies, like Oz the Great and Powerful, is particularly well done and practically mandatory.

Many shots in the movie (like where the little china girl is thrown up in the air towards the camera) are basically there for the 3D version.

In Oz (another movie I saw first in 2D), the 3D is a constant delight and full of surprises.

[Eric Sine]

I don't really understand why some people trash 3D. I think it's great. Like everything else, some conversions are better than others. I usually do my homework before sinking money into a 3D blu-ray. Checking reviews from multiple sources is commonplace before purchasing. For the most part, this has worked out well for me. I've only been disappointed on a couple of occasions. If you are looking into purchasing a 3D TV and Blu-Ray player, test it first at a friends house or Best Buy. To my knowledge, about 20% of the population is incapable of experiencing 3D due to eye conditions. So maybe some of those opposed to 3D viewing fall into that 20% and can't see the difference between 2D and 3D. Personally, I really enjoy it.

[Todd Tomorrow]

I like the sense of occasion I get when I put on my 3D glasses. I don't care that it's a "gimmick" I enjoy a good gimmick. With my active glasses 3D looks way better on my projector than it does at the cinema. I don't mind that it doesn't look 100% naturalistic, I actually like the slightly hyper real. I just think it's fun, so boohoo to the haters.

[Ray O. Blu]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

I like the sense of occasion I get when I put on my 3D glasses. I don't care that it's a "gimmick" I enjoy a good gimmick. With my active glasses 3D looks way better on my projector than it does at the cinema. I don't mind that it doesn't look 100% naturalistic, I actually like the slightly hyper real. I just think it's fun, so boohoo to the haters.

That's a great point.
If a movie looks good at the theater in 3D, I always look forward to how much better it'll look at home, also.
The IMAX 3D presentations are exceptions. They're phenomenal.
But the RealD 3D crap always looks better at home.

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

I like the sense of occasion I get when I put on my 3D glasses. I don't care that it's a "gimmick" I enjoy a good gimmick. With my active glasses 3D looks way better on my projector than it does at the cinema. I don't mind that it doesn't look 100% naturalistic, I actually like the slightly hyper real. I just think it's fun, so boohoo to the haters.

yep, this is how I've felt for years, and well articulated.

Some like to talk about the 'death of 3-D', because the fact it hasn't taken over everything makes it somehow a 'failure'. I've always viewed it as more of a special occasion rather than an everyday thing. 3-D is about adding that extra level of excitement.

[revgen]

1080p TV + Active/Passive Glasses = Good

4K TV/projector + Passive Glasses or 1080p DLP TV/Projector with Active Glasses = Better

4K DLP TV/Projector + Passive Glasses = Best

Passive glasses are easier to wear and use while exhibiting less crosstalk than active glasses. Also they require no batteries. So they can be worn like sunglasses or even used as clip-on's over your prescription glasses. Unfortunately, unlike Active glasses, they halve the resolution. So you end up watching 540 pixels of vertical resolution on your 1080p TV. That's basically SD resolution. This resolution problem is solved with 4K TV's since halving the resolution means you see 1080 pixels of vertical resolution instead of 540.

DLP TV/Projectors exhibit very little crosstalk regardless of using Active or Passive glasses.

Combine 4K + DLP + Passive glasses and I don't think consumers will complain too much about 3D Blu-Ray's at home. Full resolution. No crosstalk. Comfortable glasses.

[Interdimensional]

Originally Posted by revgen

1080p TV + Active/Passive Glasses = Good

4K TV/projector + Passive Glasses or 1080p DLP TV/Projector with Active Glasses = Better

4K DLP TV/Projector + Passive Glasses = Best

Passive glasses are easier to wear and use while exhibiting less crosstalk than active glasses. Also they require no batteries. So they can be worn like sunglasses or even used as clip-on's over your prescription glasses. Unfortunately, unlike Active glasses, they halve the resolution. So you end up watching 540 pixels of vertical resolution on your 1080p TV. That's basically SD resolution. This resolution problem is solved with 4K TV's since halving the resolution means you see 1080 pixels of vertical resolution instead of 540.

Passive 3-D on a HD set is still a lot better than SD resolution, because while the vertical resolution may be halved for each eye, you're still watching a combined resolution of 1920 x 1080.

Even if that wasn't the case, 1920 x 540 would still look a lot better than 640 x 480.

Passive is my personal preference, but either technology can be used to produce spectacular results. The higher pixel count on future sets will only sweeten the deal.

I think 3-D is good right now, and it's only going to get even more stunning.

[RallyCat]

Our natural vision is in 3-D. We see in 3-D because we are surrounded by three-dimensional objects in a three-dimensional space and with our two eyes, we have these two slightly different views of our surroundings. Our brain merges these two views into one, giving us the ability to sense depth from the visual information in these two views. A 3-D movie, although really it is just actually two flat, two-dimensional images, they were taken of three-dimensional objects in a three-dimensional space from two slightly different views. A scene shot in 3-D is very much 3-D and no different than what you would see had you actually been there.

As for wearing 3-D glasses, there really isn’t much of a simpler method to deliver two images, sending one to each eye and recreating that 3-D view on a flat surface, like a TV screen.

Not watching a 3-D movie with 3-D glasses or viewing stereo photographs with a stereoscope. This is actually the only time when we DON’T view our world in 3-D.

That said, not every movie or photo needs to be in 3-D and viewed with 3-D glasses or stereoscopes to be enjoyed. Same goes for movies or photos that don’t contain colour.

[Suntory_Times]

Originally Posted by partridge

If you stand up does the picture improve? You may need to tilt the set down slightly so you are looking "straight and centre" at it

The more simple solution is to have the center of the tv as close to eye height as is possible. This goes for 2d and 3d, but is particularly important for a quality 3d presentation.

[Pondosinatra]

So I finally got my basement home theatre ready.

First movie I threw in to watch was Mad Max: Fury Road. Figured I'd watch it in 3D on my ZT- first time watching a 3D movie at home.

Put on the glasses, popped in the disc (3D version). Player recognized it was 3D gave me the standard warning, the movie started up......

...and it looked like shit. After a couple minutes I stopped it and put in the non-3D version (which looked awesome).

It was almost as if the glasses did nothing.

???

[UFAlien]

So you saw a double image? Are you sure the glasses were powered on? If so it's also possible there was a sync issue, and anecdotally I've heard active sets tend to have more crosstalk.

[Pondosinatra]

Well I feel pretty dumb.

Ya, I didn't realize you had to turn them on - they were so light I just figured they were like the ones you get at movie theatres.

[glennvmturner]

Have had a 3DHDTV for a few years now and in the next few years I intend on getting a 3DUHDTV.

I got a 3D TV for a few reasons

- Dad found a good deal and paid a bit of it for me, so I was getting it cheap
- I like being "up to date" with my film/tv collections
- I find 3D fun and a great reason to revisit some old classics
- Though this may not remain the case, I seem to be the only one out of my group of friends with a 3D TV, so when my friends come to my flat it's a little bit like going to the cinema lol

[Interdimensional]

1) It was affordable

2) Even if it's not something to be using on a daily basis, I wouldn't want to deny myself the option. It's important to me to always have that option.

3) 3-D is Awesome.

[Gizz]

Because of this

[tezster]

Gravity

[Biss Skyler Bluray]

because of transformers dark of the moon, this movie was the reason i got a 3dtv, and i'm still loving it.

[doctor_who]

Pixar/Disney/animated. Love the 3d on them.

My favorite scene is in Tangled, the release of the candles.

[silentbob]

Had an ever growing pile of 3D movies at home and no display to use them with. Got a 3D Plasma TV but didn't align with my HT setup for my projector. So i updated my projector and have been loving it. Im not a diehard 3D fan but some movies you just need to see them that way damn it

[Hamada5557]

Need Help with Samsung H6400 3D TV
Greetings,
I bought my TV from one year ago i need to know how and where i can get 3D Movies that work correctly i faced many problems with Movies formats the TV can read Like m2ts and i downloaded many films by torrents in the end it's not work good